Page 40 - May June 2019 TPA Journal
P. 40
denied the State’s request. The vehicle’s forfeiture, SEARCH & SEIZURE – CELL PHONE
the court determined, would be grossly dis - SEARCH WITH WARRANT
proportionate to the gravity of Timbs’s offense,
and therefore uncon stitutional under the Eighth A jury convicted Charles Fulton, Sr. on four
Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause. counts of sex trafficking and one count of
conspiracy. The most significant issue concerns a
[emphasis by ed.] long-delayed search of his cell phone. We find no
basis to disturb the judgment. We AFFIRM.
The holding was upheld by the State appellate
court and reversed by the State Supreme Court In May 2016, Fulton was indicted in the U.S.
which was, in turn, reversed by the U.S. Supreme District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Court. Note this was a 9-0 decision with Gorsuch on six counts of sex trafficking in violation of 18
and Thomas filing concurring opinions. U.S.C. § 1591(a)–(b) (2015), with a different
minor victim identified in each count. He was
The Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause found guilty after a jury trial on four of the
incorporates and renders applicable to the States substantive counts and on the conspiracy count.
Bill of Rights protections “fun damental to our The district court sentenced him to prison for
scheme of ordered liberty,” or “deeply rooted in concurrent life terms.
this Nation’s history and tradition.”
We will analyze four issues. First, Fulton asserts
Protection against excessive fines has been a the district court admitted evidence obtained from
constant shield throughout Anglo-American his cell phone in violation of the Fourth
history for good reason: Such fines undermine Amendment.
other liberties. They can be used, e.g., to retaliate
against or chill the speech of political enemies. In February 2015, Galveston police obtained a
They can also be employed, not in service of penal search warrant on the Avenue L house where the
purposes, but as a source of revenue. The his - prostitution was based, but the warrant was part of
torical and logical case for concluding that the a separate investigation into Fulton’s narcotics
Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the activities. Fulton’s cell phone was seized. Nine
Excessive Fines Clause is indeed overwhelm ing. days later, police obtained a second warrant to
purposes, but as a source of revenue. The his - examine its contents but were unable to bypass the
torical and logical case for concluding that the phone’s security features. Around this same time,
Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the the FBI agent assisting with the Fulton sex-
Excessive Fines Clause is indeed overwhelm ing. trafficking investigation learned that the
Galveston police had the phone. The agent
Timbs v. Indiana, No. 17-1091, U.S. Supreme acquired it to determine if the FBI could access the
Court, Feb. 20, 2019. phone’s data. Three weeks later, that agent
obtained a federal warrant to search the phone.
****************************************
Still, it was a year later before the data on the
******************************
phone was accessed. The FBI discovered evidence
on the phone that helped piece together Fulton’s
involvement with the minor victims. Fulton
moved to suppress the evidence, but the district
court denied the motion. At trial, the Government
introduced evidence of the phone’s contents
through the testimony of the FBI agent and of
36 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • 866-997-8282 Texas Police Journal